Brooklyn: Hakeem Jeffries vs Charles Barron

Towns strikes back-- endorses Charles Barron

Earlier today, we talked a little bit about how insurgent Democrats like Matt Cartwright and Beto O'Rourke have been beating tired old Machine hacks (and in these two cases, powerful senior incumbents) and inspiring independent-minded candidates who fully embrace progressive values and shun any association with the corrupt DC Democratic leadership, sort of like Bernie Sanders has for his entire career. In practical terms, this has little to do with the intense analysis by one of Obama's former Harvard Law professors, Roberto Unger (a former Brazilian cabinet minister under Lula, who also called for Lula's impeachment), although it isn't unrelated, at least not existentially. Unger says that for progressive values to move forward, progressive voters have to help defeat Obama to teach Democrats a lesson. That's incredibly naive since, clearly, the lesson the Democratic Establishment will learn is NOT the one Unger wants to teach. They're more likely to learn that the need even more conservative candidates than Obama-- and no African Americans.

Although there was a district in Chicago and one in Philly where Obama got 90% of the vote in 2008, there were only four where he went over 90%-- Charlie Rangel's Harlem district (about 48% Hispanic/30% Black), Jose Serano's Bronx district (about 63% Hispanic/30% Black), Yvette Clarke's Brooklyn district (almost 60% Black), and the Bedford-Stuyvesant/East New York/Ft Greene Brooklyn district that has been represented by Edolphus Towns since 1982 (just over 60% Black). Towns is finally packing it in-- largely to avoid the humiliation of being defeated in a primary by progressive Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries. The newly redrawn district-- now CD-8-- is still a minority-majority district, just a little less so; Obama would "only" have beaten McCain with 86%, not 91%.

As soon as Towns announced his retirement, the Democratic Establishment embraced Jeffries-- and he embraced them back. That was a bad move-- for him. City Councilman Charles Barron, probably one of those most radical non-right-wingers in U.S. politics, has been steadily gaining-- even surging, according to the NY Times. The Democratic Establishment is panicking... big-time.

The New York political world had long ago become accustomed to the incendiary words of Mr. Barron, a confrontational onetime Black Panther turned three-term City Councilman. His more outrageous remarks over the years, from calling Thomas Jefferson a pedophile to likening Gaza to a “concentration death camp” to expressing his desire to slap “the closest white person,” have given way to a reputation as a showboat and provocateur on the political fringe.

Considered an afterthought when he announced his candidacy for the United States Congress last November-- in a speech in which he called Muammar el-Qaddafi “my hero” and pledged to never salute the American flag-- Democratic leaders are now fretfully talking about a prospect they once considered unthinkable: a Congressman Barron.

His opponent, Hakeem S. Jeffries, a state assemblyman and self-styled conciliator who has raised far more money and received far more support from the political establishment, was expected to coast to victory. So there was surprise when Mr. Barron picked up the endorsement of the city’s largest public employees union and the blessing of the man he wants to replace, Representative Edolphus Towns, who will retire. With 10 days to go before the Democratic primary, it has became clear that Mr. Barron is gaining traction, with the help of a passionate voter base in the historically black Brooklyn neighborhoods where his roots run deep.

There are signs of panic among members of the Democratic establishment, who worry Mr. Barron could prove to be a headache in their ranks and an alienating figure on the national stage.

Popular Democrats abruptly emerged this week to denounce him as a dangerous, anti-Israel radical. Edward I. Koch, the former mayor, called him a viper; other community leaders pointed reporters to the Anti-Defamation League’s list of his more provocative quotes; and in an e-mail to supporters this week, a local group of Russian Jews announced a hastily planned rally on Monday to denounce Mr. Barron as “a fringe radical and anti-Semitic, anti-Israel activist.” The first word of the subject line said it all: EMERGENCY.

In an interview, Mr. Barron would not comment on past statements, calling them “a distraction” from the issues, raised by people who are frightened by his campaign’s “building momentum.”

“Sometimes my being assertive and speaking truth to power become reduced to controversial and defiant,” he said, adding later, “I raise contradictions when I feel people who have suffered cause suffering to other people.”

The sudden rise in Mr. Barron’s fortunes has overshadowed Mr. Jeffries, who has been viewed as a rising star in New York politics with his ability to bring together white and black, rich and poor, the gentrifiers and the gentrified. Mr. Jeffries’s campaign chest is many times the size of Mr. Barron’s, having collected by this week $769,544 from 2,447 donors. Mr. Barron missed a deadline to report his contributions, but said he had almost $70,000, most of it his own money.

In some ways, the race offers a contrast between two different eras. Mr. Barron, 61, represents a throwback to the 1970s and 1980s, when black nationalists seemed to control the city’s racial conversation, while Mr. Jeffries, 41, represents the more recent model of black leaders like President Obama; Newark’s mayor, Cory A. Booker; and Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts, who have earned establishment credentials and thrived by building coalitions with white liberals.

...Because relatively few voters turn up in primaries-- particularly a primary held in June for the first time in 40 years-- the unions’ ability to pull their members and other residents to the polls is regarded as crucial, according to Hank Sheinkopf, a political consultant. Mr. Jeffries has received a slew of union endorsements like those of the Transport Workers Union and 1199 SEIU, which represents health care workers. Mr. Barron surprised many in the political world when he snagged the support of DC 37, the city’s largest public employees union. Both candidates claim records for addressing the district’s perennial complaints: rundown housing, ineffective schools, wide unemployment and what many residents see as overly harsh police tactics.

But in contrast to many of the Democratic primary battles throughout the city, this one includes sharp policy differences between candidates. Mr. Barron opposes gay marriage; Mr. Jeffries co-sponsored the legislation that legalized it. Mr. Barron is an outspoken critic of Israeli policies; Mr. Jeffries visited Israel in 2008 with the Jewish Community Relations Council. Locally, Mr. Barron opposed the building of a basketball arena and the rest of the Atlantic Yards project near downtown Brooklyn; Mr. Jeffries has sought to mitigate its impact and criticized the developer for not delivering on promised housing.

And while Mr. Jeffries takes pride in his crossover appeal, Mr. Barron has made little effort to broaden his base. Instead, he continues to use loaded language, upsetting his white and Jewish colleagues with phrases emblematic of the Holocaust; he might, for example, accuse Israel of genocide. David Greenfield, a City Council member and the grandson of Holocaust survivors, said Mr. Barron, if elected, would become “the most prominent anti-Semite in Congress.”

If There Is No Effective Oversight, We All Lose-- Get Ready

Who needs any damn oversight anyway?

Under Republicans there was no oversight of the excesses-- and downright blatant criminality-- of the Bush Regime. None. Whatsoever. After the 2006 midterms, Bush still got a pass from the contemptible shills known as the United States Senate, the Democrats having put Lieberman, a Bush ally-- thoroughly indebted to the Regime for his re-election-- in charge of oversight. There was none. But in the House, Henry Waxman took over and did a spectacular job, which, thanks to Nancy Pelosi's "off the table" diktat, led precisely... nowhere.

Now, if you were the Democratic Establishment and had just won control of the White House and Congress, one thing you are absolutely certain of is that oversight is something you neither want nor need. So let's ease Waxman into a "better" job where he can't do any harm, and let's find the stupidest, laziest most inconsequential member of Congress to take over House oversight, and leave the Senate just as it is, just so long as Lieberman knows who he owes his position to now. No one would make a better oversight chairman than Edolphus Towns-- if the purpose is to make sure there's no oversight. And Wednesday the unscrupulous hypocrites in the House Democratic caucus elected him.

The selection formally puts to bed weeks of speculation about who would lead the committee in the next Congress. Waxman’s departure to head the Energy and Commerce Committee set off a brief, largely behind-the-scenes struggle for the gavel....

Towns was next in seniority, but was not seen as the top choice of Democratic leaders. They worked quietly to arrange for someone else to replace Waxman until it became clear that Towns was intent on taking over as chairman.

Sure they did-- because if there's one thing Rahm Emanuel wants now, it's tough oversight for the Executive Branch!

On the other hand, one of the most pusillanimous Republicans serving in Congress, the execrably hypocritical Pete Hoekstra-- who should be dragged before the War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague along with Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld for the stunning non-job he did at Intelligence Oversight-- just declared that the "relationship between Congress and the executive must change." Yes, this morning the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee, who wants to run for Michigan governor, suddenly woke up, as if out of an eight-year snooze, and wants to keep the country safe. Republicans, he said, will "conduct aggressive oversight of the Obama administration’s intelligence efforts and encourage our Democratic colleagues to do the same.” He said it with a straight face.

Well, at least there's a solid bipartisan effort to hold the Bush Regime's feet to the oversight fire when it comes to the $700 billion Wall Street bailout, right? No, not right. Texas' worst far right extremist, Republican lunatic fringe maniac Jeb Hensarling, claims the oversight is not serious and is trying to politicize the efforts and threatening to quit the committee.

Elizabeth Warren, the panel's chairwoman, told the House Financial Services Committee on Wednesday that bailout panel members would investigate how banks are spending the money they have received from the program, known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and whether it was helping the "real economy."

The mission of the four-member panel was outlined in a report it issued Wednesday, which Mr. Hensarling voted against. In an interview after the hearing, Ms. Warren appeared to be surprised by Mr. Hensarling's opposition – in part because "he never objected to a single word in the draft," she said.

"I asked for his comments repeatedly and received none," said Ms. Warren, a Harvard professor who was appointed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Ms. Warren also said Mr. Hensarling had not personally attended meetings with other TARP watchdogs, including the Treasury Department inspector general and the Government Accountability Office. Instead, Mr. Hensarling sent representatives to some, she said.

When told of Ms. Warren's comments, Mr. Hensarling chafed at what he said wasn't a serious attempt to incorporate Republican ideas into the panel's work.

Yep, that's Republican Party oversight melded with Republican Party bipartisanship: give all the money to the banksters, cut their taxes and leave them alone and watch the magic of the free markets keep the Bush Economic Miracle alive. And if the loathsome Hensarling does resign, the panel will have no Republicans. The other GOP appointee, wingnut Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), resigned last week, citing his busy legislative workload, and not mentioning that he's the Republican senator most likely to lose his job in 2010.


FOOTNOTE: ELIZABETH WARREN IS
A GREAT GUEST WITH RACHEL MADDOW

by Ken

Rachel asked Ms. Warren about the astoundingly basic questions her oversight panel is asking, like is there a plan for this bailout? And what might that plan be? Incredibly basic they may be, but they are also the questions that somebody's got to be asking. Ms. Warren pointed out that she's only recently been appointed to chair the oversight committee, but she spoke about the bailout issues with clarity, confidence, and force -- to the point where Rachel expressed the hope that she would be appearing widely to explain these issues, and hoped she would be back on Rachel's show soon.

It would appear that Representative Hensarling's total possible contribution to the commission's work is zero, and the panel will get a lot more accomplished without him. Of course it won't be "bipartisan" anymore. But while we have a president-elect who seems serious in his attachment to "bipartisanship," we also still have a Republican Party that defines the concept, "You're welcome to agree with our ultra-right-wing ideology, as long as you don't attempt to alter it in any way. Otherwise it will be our pleasure to launch crusades of lying smears against you and everyone you've ever come in contact with."

#

Hillary Clinton Should Be Senate Majority Leader And Make The Job Worth Something

Today some Insider publication attacked me by referring to me as a "Democratic Party operative." They might be in for a surprise if they ever read DWT. Tonight, for example, I want to describe a member of Congress we've talked about before. He is a lazy, incompetent, corrupt old hack, a sleazy Brooklyn Democrat named Edolphus Towns who we talked about last summer in the context of a primary:

Yesterday's NY Times focused on the insurgent primary against shady Bedford Stuyvesant/Ft Greene incumbent Edolphus Towns, a corporate shill for Big Pharma and telecoms and one of the notorious CAFTA-15. He's another Al Wynn in terms of voting for The Man both on the bankruptcy bill that has devastated his own constituents and on the estate tax, which is basically fine for people who have hundreds of millions of dollars but not too good for inner city working and middle class families. The Times story doesn't mention any of Towns' many flaws-- a corporate-oriented Democrat in one of the-- if not the-- most Democratic districts in the U.S. (PVI is an astounding D+41.) Instead the Times focuses on Towns' ill-advised support for Hillary Clinton over Obama, something he shared with virtually every other Democratic elected official in New York City.

He won his primary and it looks like a plum assignment fell into his lap today: the chairmanship of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that was handled so admirably, energetically and ably by Henry Waxman (who is moving on to the Energy and Commerce Committee).

I recall that when the Republicans controlled the entire government and brazenly ran roughshod over the entire system one of the complaints was that Congress had abdicated it's oversight responsibilities and had a tacit deal with the Bush Regime allowing it to do whatever it wanted so long as members of Congress could take all the bribes they wanted. It worked great for years until some on both sides of the deal over-reached a bit more than the voters were willing to put up with. After the 2006 win by the Democrats, the slothful GOP hack, ex-Congressman Tom Davis (R-VA) was booted from the chair and suddenly the committee became a hub of oversight. (While Clinton was president, the GOP-run committee issued 1,052 subpoenas to probe alleged presidential misconduct and wasted $35 million in the process. Only 3 subpoenas were issued while Bush was in the White House and the Republicans controlled the committee. The only noteworthy investigations they did were of Terri Schiavo and steroid use in baseball.

Today when I was contemplating the Democrats settling on a nincompoop like Towns, instead of skipping down to Carolyn Maloney, Elijah Cummings, Dennis Kucinich, Danny Davis or John Tierney, the other most senior members, I wondered if the Democratic Insider Establishment isn't just as happy having a bumbling and ineffectual fool like Towns "running" the show so that there will be as much oversight for the Obama Administration as there was under Tom Davis' for the Bush Regime.

And even if the Obama Administration starts off as a bunch of White Knights, history and common sense tell us that sooner or, hopefully later, it is going to need some serious oversight to keep from straying too far off the tracks. After all, just take a look at what Obama put in as chief of staff. No exaggeration: Bush never made a more venal and hideous appointment.

The trust the American people put in the Democrats by entrusting the House, the Senate and the White House to the party, means someone has to take oversight seriously. Wouldn't it be ironic if that someone turned out to be... Joe Lieberman!

A better solution: less of a kiss ass, beholden Senate leadership. For his own sake, the current Majority Leader should hearken to the lesson of his Democratic predecessor from South Dakota and trade in the Majority Leader's role for a powerful committee chair. In 2010, which, historically speaking, could be a good year for a Republican resurgence, Reid's seat will be up and he will be target #1 in a very purple, politically unstable state. McConnell and the Republicans will be looking for some payback and Reid would be far better off running as the moderate Democrat that he is, than as someone who has to defend the somewhat more progressive bent of the whole caucus. That's how Daschle lost.

Hillary Clinton would be a far better Majority Leader. It looks like that whole Secretary of State thing isn't happening-- or is it?-- and Democratic leaders say they're "willing" to give her an enhanced leadership role in the Senate. Screw them! She should be Leader. "Clinton asked to join the Senate Democratic leadership after the Nov. 4 election, and party leaders began trying to figure out a way to accommodate her without dislodging any of the current leaders, Democratic officials said."

The uncertainty, a week after Mr. Obama met with Mrs. Clinton in Chicago to discuss the idea of her leading the State Department, kept Washington spinning in feverish speculation about whether the two former rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination would team up. Mrs. Clinton was keeping counsel only with a tight circle of confidants, leaving even prominent veterans of the Clinton political operation guessing as to her intentions.

But driving her consideration, friends said, is a sense of disenchantment with the Senate, where despite her stature she remains low in the ranks of seniority that governs the body. She was particularly upset, they said, at the reception she felt she received when she returned from the campaign after collecting 18 million votes and almost becoming the first woman ever nominated for president by a major party.

“Her experience in the Senate with some of her colleagues has not been the easiest time for her,” said one longtime friend who insisted on anonymity in exchange for sharing Mrs. Clinton’s sentiments. “She’s still a very junior senator. She doesn’t have a committee. And she’s had some disappointing times with her colleagues.”

In particular, the friend said, Mrs. Clinton was upset when the leadership rejected the possibility of her heading a special new task force with a staff and a mandate to develop legislation expanding health care coverage... Mr. Reid wants to come up with some sort of leadership position to recognize Mrs. Clinton’s standing as one of the party’s most popular figures, and aides said he was confident that he could arrive at something with sufficient muscle to appeal to her.

And he should-- by resigning as Leader and nominating her to replace himself. Chance of that happening? Not nearly as good as Edolphus Towns becoming Chairman of the Oversight Committee. The reason I want her-- because she wouldn't be a patsy for Obama-- is just one of many reasons the hidebound Establishment is never going to let that happen-- anymore than the Republicans would consider giving John McCain a leadership role in their caucus.


UPDATE: LOOKS LIKE I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WONDERING ABOUT LETTING TOWNS FALL INTO THE CHAIRMANSHIP

Most people I talk to who are following this think Elijah Cummings (D-MD) is the best qualified for the gig and I'm hearing Waxman is prodding him to try for it. Pelosi's camp sees Towns realistically and realize he's a lazy, corrupt slug. It's likely that Councilman Charles Barron will challenge him again in 2010 and beat him this time. Hundred guys like Barron in Congress and we'd have a chance to move an actual progressive agenda forward!

Primary Day In New York-- And Six Other States

Howie drags another unsuspecting congressional candidate, Jon Powers, to a raw food restaurant

There are a seven states with primaries today, although New York's is the only one worth reporting on. A gaggle of greasy Republicans are fighting amongst each other to take on Carol Shea-Porter and Paul Hodes in New Hampshire but Carol and Paul are expected to beat back whichever clown is nominated by the reactionaries. The gubernatorial primary in Delaware takes on some meaning because whoever wins the Democratic nod is likely to be appointing a U.S. Senator after November.

In New York, however, there really are some hot races. In the Staten Island/Brooklyn district (NY-13), the Democratic Establishment has gotten behind pro-war, pro-corporate, conservative shill Michael McMahon from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party while grassroots Democrats back Steve Harrison. According to this morning's CQPolitics "Harrison held Fossella to the lowest take of his congressional career, 57 percent, in 2006 but with the scandal surrounding Fossella and the subsequent chance to pick up the seat, Democrats turned to McMahon for the general election. McMahon reported raising $717,000 and had $413,000 on hand through Aug. 20, according to his pre-primary report, while Harrison raised $201,000 and had $45,000 on hand by the same date. The Republican primary, meanwhile, has turned nasty. Two candidates are competing for the party nomination: former state Rep. Robert Straniere and Staten Island GOP Finance Chair Jamshad Wyne. The district encompasses all of Staten Island and the southern tip of Brooklyn and both county Republican parties have endorsed Straniere. But Wyne has boosted his candidacy with $325,000 in self-loans, which puts him far ahead of Straniere in fundraising. Wyne raised $334,000 and had $203,000 on hand through Aug. 20 while Straniere raised $15,000 and had $12,000 on hand by the same date. The local Conservative Party favors McMahon but the state party overruled their attempt to endorse him. Instead the Conservatives are running their own far right lunatic fringe candidate, depriving the GOP of their line-- and likely to help the Democrat in November.

Up in the suburban/exurban area between Buffalo and Rochester (NY-26) the DCCC insiders and the grassroots are on the same side-- both backing Jon Powers against an extremely nasty and deranged Republican billionaire running as a Democrat, Jack Davis. Davis has spent $3.6 million on his campaign and, according to CQPolitics has no support whatsoever from the Democratic Party and is simply running a "sabotage campaign against Powers... bleeding him dry,” something which may well help Davis' old friends in the GOP come November.

In the Albany district, where Mike McNulty is one of the few Democrats retiring from Congress this year, the field is crowded and the campaign hasn't yielded much heat or light. Soundpolitic over at TheAlbanyProject has the best analysis I've seen and has come to the conclusion that Phil Steck is the best candidate.

There is also an outside chance that Kevin Powell will beat corrupt reactionary Democratic hack Edolphus Towns in Brooklyn. CQPolitics: "It will be Towns’ second tough challenge in a row after winning the 2006 Democratic primary with less than 50 percent of the vote over two little-known Democratic challengers. Towns was criticized by party leadership for failing to vote with the party, including a vote in support of the Central American Free Trade Agreement, which passed 217-215 but was unpopular with many top Democrats. Towns is favored to survive the primary; he has raised more than 10 times more money than Powell ($1.2 million to $100,000) and had seven times more cash on hand ($417,000 to $57,000) by Aug. 20."

And speaking of New York, Ed Koch, a posterboy for Democrats who have gone over to the Dark Side, has taken leave of his Republican allies and endorsed Obama. He says Palin is too scary for mainstream Americans to support the McCain-Palin ticket.

I have concluded that the country is safer in the hands of Barack Obama, leader of the Democratic Party and protector of the philosophy of that party. Protecting and defending the U.S. means more than defending us from foreign attacks. It includes defending the public with respect to their civil rights, civil liberties and other needs, e.g., national health insurance, the right of abortion, the continuation of Social Security, gay rights, other rights of privacy, fair progressive taxation and a host of other needs and rights.

If the vice president were ever called on to lead the country, there is no question in my mind that the experience and demonstrated judgment of Joe Biden is superior to that of Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is a plucky, exciting candidate, but when her record is examined, she fails miserably with respect to her views on the domestic issues that are so important to the people of the U.S., and to me. Frankly, it would scare me if she were to succeed John McCain in the presidency.

McCAIN'S ECONOMIC POLICIES ARE BANKRUPT

A buddy of mine called because he's thinking of jumping in to the Kevin Powell race to unseat machine Democrat, Edolphus Towns in Brooklyn. He wanted to know what were the worst (i.e.- most Republican) things Towns had done lately as a congressman from one of the most heavily Democratic districts in America. I had written about the Towns-Powell primary last week and I recall be especially outraged that he had voted in favor of to bills that are obviously special interests legislation that are harmful for the overwhelming majority of his constituents: the heinous credit-card-written bankruptcy bill and the estate bill to abolish the estate tax. Corrupt Democrats like Towns (and Al Wynn) were paid handsomely to cross the aisle and vote with the Republicans on these two travesties against economic justice.

It looks like some of McCain's personal servants must have spoken with him last night about the economy because this morning he said he imagines we're in a recession. I wonder if he will ever be able to stretch that imagination of his and figure out that the policies he's been pushing for the past 7 years are what caused it. "I would imagine that technically there’s some question amongst economists about that," croaked. "The fact is Americans are hurting, they’re hurting badly.” Yes, they are-- and one of the policies he backed, taking bribes from the same crooked credit card companies that paid off Edolphus Towns in Brooklyn, was the bankruptcy bill they both voted for. "When it comes to strengthening the safety net for hardworking families, [McCain's] been part of the problem, not part of the solution," Obama told a crowd of admirers in Georgia today.

Although most reporters covering the campaign preferred to yammer about the he said/she said infotainment aspects of the political "news," today's Wall Street Journal covered the substance of his proposal to reform the detrimental Republican/Blue Dog bankruptcy bill. Basically, Obama wants to "make it easier for homeowners devastated by illness or other such hardships to keep their houses during periods of insolvency."

In 2005 Obama-- unlike Towns and McCain-- voted against the credit card companies bankruptcy bill that has devastated so many American families. Obama pointed out it was just a sop to "special interests," a polite way of saying that Towns and McCain are crooked political hacks who took money from the banking interests and gave them the bill they wanted in return, regardless of what harm it caused to so many families, especially considering that most bankruptcies are the results of massive medical catastrophes. The bankruptcy bill McCain and Towns were so happy to vote for has also had a devastating effect on military families, who have lost their homes while their breadwinners were fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"While I was opposing the credit card industry's bankruptcy bill that made it harder for working families to climb out of debt, [Sen. McCain] was supporting it-- and he even opposed helping families who were only in bankruptcy because of medical bills they couldn't pay,'' Sen. Obama told a crowd at a townhall event outside of Atlanta. "He sided with the big banks again when it came to protecting the most valuable possession that older Americans have-- their home.''

Sen. Obama's proposal would establish a minimum national "homestead" level for homeowners, pegged to the region's median home value, which would prevent creditors from attaching assets for non-payment.

The policy would also impose a 120-day moratorium on bad-credit reporting and waive requirements, such as mandatory credit counseling for people who filed for a bankruptcy as a result of a catastrophic illness, and means testing for many others. The Obama campaign claims that roughly half of the 500,000 personal bankruptcies filed last year were the result of an uninsured, catastrophic illness.

Obama's proposal would fast-track the process for military families, help seniors keep their homes, and protect people recovering from natural disasters. McCain's lobbyist-driven campaign is filled with crooks who made millions of dollars getting the bill passed originally. And McCain just doesn't understand economics and doesn't care to-- he doesn't even know how Social Security works.

TWO INTERESTING PRIMARIES IN NYC-- STATEN ISLAND AND BEDFORD STUYVESANT

Ever since the inebriated only NYC GOP congressman, Vito Fossella, from Staten Island, was pulled over in Virginia and started painfully unraveling his very sordid life in public-- yes, he's the pro-family values Republican with two families, one back home (the official one) and one in Virginia (closer to the office)-- it has looked likely that New York Democrats might turn a 4th red seat blue in November. With Eric Massa, Jon Powers and Dan Maffei all ready to join next year's freshman class, suddenly Steve Harrison was looking like a contender. Just this morning, in fact, Congressional Quarterly changed it's rating from No Clear Favorite to Democrat Favored.

John Boehner, who forced Fossella to declare he wouldn't run again, tried inserting his own candidate but he was turned down-- 4 times. The GOP got stuck with a political nonentity, Frank Powers, a self-funder with an influential wife... and a son, also named Frank Powers, who said he would run against him-- and then the senior Powers died on June 22. With the primary coming up Sept. 9, GOP leaders have all but given up trying to find a consensus candidate. The Brooklyn Republican Boss, Ed Eaton, is backing another rich, retired investment banker Paul Atanasio, but Staten Island Republicans, who have more say-so in the selection, aren't getting on board, partially because Atanasio lives in Brooklyn and not State Island but also because he isn't even a registered Republican, but a member of the Conservative Party.

Brooklyn political consultant Gerry O’Brien, who works with clients from both major parties, said Republicans’ recruiting problems all but assured Democrats would win the 13th District in November.

“It’s flabbergasting. That’s the only word I can think of. It is as if they seem intent on serving this seat up to Democrats on a silver platter with chocolate mints around the edge,” O’Brien said.

Not so fast, though. The Democrats have their own battle for the nomination going on. It isn't between Brooklyn and Staten Island parties though. Both have endorsed conservative Democratic insider City Councilman Michael McMahon. In fact, he's so conservative that he went to the Conservative Party and asked for their endorsement-- and nearly got it! But even though Harrison had been endorsed by Chuck Schumer early on and even though Harrison had come closer to beating Fossella in 2006 than any other challenger had previously, the insidious DCCC declared McMahon their preferred candidate.

Democrats had put the 13th District on their prospective target list after the 2006 election, when underfunded candidate Stephen Harrison held Fossella to 57 percent, the lowest vote share of his congressional career. They wasted no time in ramping up their takeover effort after Fossella, then still a heavy favorite to win re-election, saw his House career disintegrated by scandal.

The national party quickly coalesced behind McMahon, even though Harrison, a lawyer, has entered the September Democratic primary and argues he earned the shot by taking on the reputedly unbeatable Fossella last time. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced it has reserved $2.1 million in New York City television time for the race and has added McMahon to its “Red to Blue” programs for candidates running competitive bids for Republican-held seats.

McMahon has the backing from the Democratic Establishment. Harrison, on the other hand, is on the right side of all the important issues. It should be an interesting primary battle. The Republicans' dilemma is worse. Hot dog vendor Robert Straniere, who is detested by the Republican power-structure, has tossed his hat into the ring. Staten Island longtime GOP political boss, Guy Molinari, "described Mr. Straniere’s chances of being supported by the Republican leadership as 'impossible.' He said that Mr. Straniere 'would not be at all acceptable to the Republican Party. I would speculate that 98 percent of the Republican County Committee would say, "No dice." They would rather vote for a Democrat than for Straniere.'” Especially a right-of-center Democrat like McMahon.

But picking between a Democrat who is likely to vote with the Republicans on key issues next year and one who is underfunded and would have more trouble picking up disgruntled Republican voters, isn't the only problem NYC Democrats are facing. There is a serious challenge in another part of Brooklyn, a very different part of Brooklyn. Yesterday's NY Times focused on the insurgent primary against shady Bedford Stuyvesant/Ft Greene incumbent Edolphus Towns, a corporate shill for Big Pharma and telecoms and one of the notorious CAFTA-15. He's another Al Wynn in terms of voting for The Man both on the bankruptcy bill that has devastated his own constituents and on the estate tax, which is basically fine for people who have hundreds of millions of dollars but not too good for inner city working and middle class families. The Times story doesn't mention any of Towns' many flaws-- a corporate-oriented Democrat in one of the-- if not the-- most Democratic districts in the U.S. (PVI is an astounding D+41.) Instead the Times focuses on Towns' ill-advised support for Hillary Clinton over Obama, something he shared with virtually every other Democratic elected official in New York City.

Brooklyn’s 10th Congressional District, home to more African-Americans than any other in New York, gave Senator Barack Obama his highest margin of victory in the state. But the district’s longtime congressman, Edolphus Towns, did not share his constituency’s preference for Mr. Obama. Now some of those voters are pushing to oust him.

“His decision not to back Obama shows he is out of touch with his constituents,” said N. Chandler, a former city corrections officer who lives in Bedford-Stuyvesant and who had supported Mr. Towns in the past. “And I think the people of this district are ready for a change.”

...An emerging young black political class is seeking to assert the neighborhood’s power against what it sees as an older establishment, based in Harlem, that has long exercised disproportionate influence in New York. The younger Democratic activists link... Mr. Towns, the son of a North Carolina sharecropper and a 25-year veteran in Congress, to that structure.

Mr. Towns cannot afford to take the challenge lightly. Two years ago, he won with less than 50 percent of the vote in a three-way race. The man who is running against him now, Kevin Powell, is a community organizer who has the backing of celebrities like the comedian Dave Chappelle, who is scheduled to headline a fund-raiser for Mr. Powell. [He was on the first season of MTV's The Real World back in 1992, "the brooding, angst-ridden young black man with the hi-top fade" and then went on to be a star journalist for Vibe Magazine.]

Jordan Thomas, who led the organization Brooklyn for Barack, and Arthur Leopold, a fund-raiser for the Obama campaign, are backing Mr. Powell, as are several Democratic clubs, including the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats, in part because of members’ disappointment after Mr. Towns backed Mrs. Clinton.

The Times does its readers a disservice to imply that the whole reason for the battle is because of Towns' support for Hillary in the primary. As City Limits explains, there are plenty of reasons for dissatisfaction with Towns in Brooklyn. And plenty of reasons for enthusiasm for Powell.

If elected, he would become the first and the most identifiable member of the hip-hop generation ever to serve in the U.S. Congress. On national issues, both Powell and Towns oppose the war in Iraq and support a single-payer healthcare system. But while campaigning on Memorial Day, Powell told practically every resident he encountered about the catalyst for his candidacy: The incumbent’s "absent and ineffective advocacy" on a host of local needs. "What we need in Congress from this district, as we enter a new presidential administration and a new decade, is active leadership that deals with the concerns of regular working-class people," he says.

...[C]ritics charge that Towns has become increasingly disconnected in recent years from the constituents he has represented since 1983, citing everything from his apparent failure to follow through on a once-promised effort to help enact a federal empowerment zone for the borough, to his endorsement of U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton during the Democratic presidential primary in a district that heavily favors Obama. "Two years ago, there was already a great deal of dissatisfaction" with Towns, says former Assemblyman Green, who now teaches education policy at Medgar Evers College and plans to withhold his endorsement until the petition signing process concludes July 10. "I don’t think that he’s made up any ground toward improving his relations with the overall community."